On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 WKRfresno_at_aol.com wrote:
>
> adrian wrote:
>
> Bill Ra> ymond said:
> >
> > <<It is possible for a position to be both solvable and unsolvable at the
> > same time. Unsolvable when reached while playing a game with a
> > transposition table; solvable when used as an initial position.>>
> >
> > So how the **&%$_at_%$ do you figure that? Example, please. (Maybe your
> > transposition table transposes it into another game with different rules?)
>
>
> Adrian, my friend and esteemed frequent correspondant, thank you for your
> "genteel eloquence?" It's good way to get me rolling in the morning.
>
> Shlomi has the right idea.
>
> But, perhaps
> 1. I've set up a straw man.
> 2. Game theory or game-tree theory can prove that I'm just plain wrong.
>
From what my lecturer for Game Theory told me, Game Theory does not deal
with single-person games. I guess that's specific to game AI, and other
branches of mathematics or CS.
> I'll give a clear illustration of my opinion using abstractions but not with
> concrete positions. Does anyone else want to weigh in on this subject before
> I do that?
>
No, please go ahead.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
> Bill Raymond
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish shlomif_at_vipe.technion.ac.il
Home Page:
http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
Home E-mail: shlomif_at_iglu.org.il
He who re-invents the wheel, understands much better how a wheel works.
Received on Tue Jun 25 2002 - 21:51:07 IDT